Opinion
Civil No. 09-1214 (DWF/SRN).
August 23, 2010
Ethel J. Schaen, Esq., Schaen Law Office; and Thomas A. Krause, Esq., Thomas A. Krause, PC, counsel for Plaintiff.
Lonnie F. Bryan, Assistant United States Attorney, United States Attorney's Office, counsel for Defendant.
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
This matter is before the Court upon Defendant Michael J. Astrue's ("Defendant") objections to Magistrate Judge Susan Richard Nelson's Report and Recommendation dated July 13, 2010, recommending that: (1) Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment be granted as to remand; (2) Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment be denied to the extent Plaintiff seeks an outright award of benefits; (3) Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment be denied; and (4) the case be remanded to the Commissioner for further proceedings consistent with Magistrate Judge Nelson's Report and Recommendation pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).
The Court has conducted a de novo review of the record, including a review of the arguments and submissions of counsel, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Local Rule 72.2(b). The factual background for the above-entitled matter is clearly and precisely set forth in the Report and Recommendation and is incorporated by reference for purposes of Defendant's objections.
Based upon the de novo review of the record and all of the arguments and submissions of the parties and the Court being otherwise duly advised in the premises, the Court hereby enters the following:
ORDER
1. Defendant Michael J. Astrue's objections (Doc. No. [17]) to Magistrate Judge Susan Richard Nelson's Report and Recommendation dated July 13, 2010, are DENIED.
2. Magistrate Susan Richard Nelson's Report and Recommendation dated July 13, 2010 (Doc. No. [16]), is ADOPTED.
3. Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. [10]) is GRANTED as to remand.
4. Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. [10]) is DENIED to the extent Plaintiff seeks an outright award of benefits.
5. Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. No. [13]) is DENIED.
6. The case is REMANDED to the Commissioner for further proceedings consistent with this Report and Recommendation pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g).